Soldier Exercises Free Speech-Gets Arrested

[Missourian]

Additionally, on the stop/loss and involuntarily mobilization; when you enlist you obligate yourself for a period of active duty and reserve duty. Soldiers that are stop lossed are at the end of their active duty obligation but still have a reserve obligation.

In that vein they still owe the Army time and the military is basically just activating them out of the reserves.

By my understanding you can't be activated past your MSO (which is your total obligation).

I still think it's bullshit, but it's not like those who are stop-lossed were on their way to being completely done with the military.

Edit-Ignore this post. It's redundant.

That is exactly right...after being discharged from active duty, your contract stipulates a period of service in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR), usually four years.

A "stoploss" is equivalent to an instant activation from the IRR.

 

[Navy1960]

Many responses are what I guessed so my question is this: How is the forfeiture of the Constitution justified? On what grounds do you legitimize removing many of the Rights the Soldiers are giving their lives for? Obviously it would be silly to say they can show up to formation out of uniform. I'm not suggesting abandoning the entire structure in any way at all. What I am asking is about off-duty activities. Why should Soldiers who are off duty be forced to live without the very document they have pledged their lives to Defend?

First, I will answer your other posting, you assmued that my posting was directed at you , it was NOT, I read your OP, it was you who made the choice to respond to it. When you join the Military it's not a 9-5 job, it a 365/24 commitment that you swore an oath to do. Further they are not living without the constitution, in fact the UCMJ was established by that very constitution Article 1 Sec. 8.

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provided that Congress has the power to regulate the land and naval forces.

Since 1806 when the Articles of War first came into being the members of the Military have been subject to them What you are advocating is that the UCMJ be cast aside and that members of the Military be civilians when off duty under the law. What you don't realize is that they would actually be violating the constitution by doing so. Again, as in your original OP Free Speech as it apples to the UCMJ does not exist for military members and as the UCMJ was established by the constitution , they ARE defending both.

 

[CurveLight]

Many responses are what I guessed so my question is this: How is the forfeiture of the Constitution justified? On what grounds do you legitimize removing many of the Rights the Soldiers are giving their lives for? Obviously it would be silly to say they can show up to formation out of uniform. I'm not suggesting abandoning the entire structure in any way at all. What I am asking is about off-duty activities. Why should Soldiers who are off duty be forced to live without the very document they have pledged their lives to Defend?

First, I will answer your other posting, you assmued that my posting was directed at you , it was NOT, I read your OP, it was you who made the choice to respond to it. When you join the Military it's not a 9-5 job, it a 365/24 commitment that you swore an oath to do. Further they are not living without the constitution, in fact the UCMJ was established by that very constitution Article 1 Sec. 8.

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provided that Congress has the power to regulate the land and naval forces.

Since 1806 when the Articles of War first came into being the members of the Military have been subject to them What you are advocating is that the UCMJ be cast aside and that members of the Military be civilians when off duty under the law. What you don't realize is that they would actually be violating the constitution by doing so. Again, as in your original OP Free Speech as it apples to the UCMJ does not exist for military members and as the UCMJ was established by the constitution , they ARE defending both.

When I said they forfeit the Constitution I'm referring specifically to Freedoms of Speech, Press, and Expression. You are on call 24/7 but you are not on duty 24/7.

 

[CurveLight]

Additionally, on the stop/loss and involuntarily mobilization; when you enlist you obligate yourself for a period of active duty and reserve duty. Soldiers that are stop lossed are at the end of their active duty obligation but still have a reserve obligation.

In that vein they still owe the Army time and the military is basically just activating them out of the reserves.

By my understanding you can't be activated past your MSO (which is your total obligation).

I still think it's bullshit, but it's not like those who are stop-lossed were on their way to being completely done with the military.

Edit-Ignore this post. It's redundant.

That is exactly right...after being discharged from active duty, your contract stipulates a period of service in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR), usually four years.

A "stoploss" is equivalent to an instant activation from the IRR.

When I was in the IRR was six years, regardless. At least it was for me and the other Troops I knew.

 

[WillowTree]

After learning the Military reneged on it's contract to allow Spc Hall out of the Army after serving 4 years he wrote a protest song containing violent lyrics. In response, the military arrested him. Stop Loss has been a quiet thunder for quite a few years. For those who don't know, Soldiers face the ultimate of morose ironies. They voluntarily offer to Sacrifice their lives to defend the Constitution but they themselves have to foreit the Constitution in the process. The UCMJ is the supreme law of their land, not the Constitution. They do not have Freedom of the Press, Expression, or Speech. So the question is this: Should those who Sacrifice their lives defending Free Speech be prosecuted for exercising Free Speech?
Soldier at US base jailed for angry rap song - NewsFlash - al.com

Evidently the Fort Hood Soldier had plenty of free speech without hinderance from the law.. how'd that work out for ya?

 

[CurveLight]

After learning the Military reneged on it's contract to allow Spc Hall out of the Army after serving 4 years he wrote a protest song containing violent lyrics. In response, the military arrested him. Stop Loss has been a quiet thunder for quite a few years. For those who don't know, Soldiers face the ultimate of morose ironies. They voluntarily offer to Sacrifice their lives to defend the Constitution but they themselves have to foreit the Constitution in the process. The UCMJ is the supreme law of their land, not the Constitution. They do not have Freedom of the Press, Expression, or Speech. So the question is this: Should those who Sacrifice their lives defending Free Speech be prosecuted for exercising Free Speech?
Soldier at US base jailed for angry rap song - NewsFlash - al.com

Evidently the Fort Hood Soldier had plenty of free speech without hinderance from the law.. how'd that work out for ya?

Damn. Was really hoping nobody would sink that level of intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Navy1960]

Many responses are what I guessed so my question is this: How is the forfeiture of the Constitution justified? On what grounds do you legitimize removing many of the Rights the Soldiers are giving their lives for? Obviously it would be silly to say they can show up to formation out of uniform. I'm not suggesting abandoning the entire structure in any way at all. What I am asking is about off-duty activities. Why should Soldiers who are off duty be forced to live without the very document they have pledged their lives to Defend?

First, I will answer your other posting, you assmued that my posting was directed at you , it was NOT, I read your OP, it was you who made the choice to respond to it. When you join the Military it's not a 9-5 job, it a 365/24 commitment that you swore an oath to do. Further they are not living without the constitution, in fact the UCMJ was established by that very constitution Article 1 Sec. 8.

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provided that Congress has the power to regulate the land and naval forces.

Since 1806 when the Articles of War first came into being the members of the Military have been subject to them What you are advocating is that the UCMJ be cast aside and that members of the Military be civilians when off duty under the law. What you don't realize is that they would actually be violating the constitution by doing so. Again, as in your original OP Free Speech as it apples to the UCMJ does not exist for military members and as the UCMJ was established by the constitution , they ARE defending both.

When I said they forfeit the Constitution I'm referring specifically to Freedoms of Speech, Press, and Expression. You are on call 24/7 but you are not on duty 24/7.

The term "active duty" means:

•full-time duty (other than active duty for training) performed by a member of the uniformed services;

•full-time duty (other than for training purposes) as a commissioned officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or its predecessor organization the Coast and Geodetic Survey, or in the Regular or Reserve Corps of the Public Health Service;

•service as a cadet at the United States Military, Air Force, or Coast Guard Academy, or as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy; and

•authorized travel to or from the duties described above.


Reservists fall into two categories--active and inactive. Active reservists fall into the category of "weekend warrior." This group of reservists participates in training one weekend a month with their various units and once a year work for two weeks straight in Field Training Exercises (FTX). Inactive reservists do not participate in training exercises, do not receive pay and are not required to attend field training. Inactive duty are required by law to notify the Army if they move. Inactive status can only be achieved by serving first in the regular or active reserve forces. When war is declared, active reservists are called first, then inactive reservists are recalled and finally, if necessary, comes conscription
What Is Army Reserve Duty? | eHow.com

There is no such thing as on-call duty, if your on active duty, guess what your on active duty 24/7.

 

[geauxtohell]

Additionally, on the stop/loss and involuntarily mobilization; when you enlist you obligate yourself for a period of active duty and reserve duty. Soldiers that are stop lossed are at the end of their active duty obligation but still have a reserve obligation.

In that vein they still owe the Army time and the military is basically just activating them out of the reserves.

By my understanding you can't be activated past your MSO (which is your total obligation).

I still think it's bullshit, but it's not like those who are stop-lossed were on their way to being completely done with the military.

Edit-Ignore this post. It's redundant.

That is exactly right...after being discharged from active duty, your contract stipulates a period of service in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR), usually four years.

A "stoploss" is equivalent to an instant activation from the IRR.

When I was in the IRR was six years, regardless. At least it was for me and the other Troops I knew.

Between the time I signed my papers in '97 and was honorably discharge out of the IRR last December, the IRR has become a completely different animal.

It was a giant mess under Rumsfeld (as was everything), but Gates has made it better.

That being said, the IRR is being heavily leaned on. I know of few people in the IRR that haven't been recalled.

So it's really six in one and 1/2 a dozen in the other. There is no "safe haven" in the IRR anymore if you still have a reserve obligation.

If you had six years of IRR obligation, I would venture to guess you did two years active duty. As I understand it, it's an eight year total obligation. Whatever you do active is subtracted from that 8 for your reserve obligation. If you serve eight years on active duty and get out, you have no reserve obligation whatsoever.

 

[CurveLight]

First, I will answer your other posting, you assmued that my posting was directed at you , it was NOT, I read your OP, it was you who made the choice to respond to it. When you join the Military it's not a 9-5 job, it a 365/24 commitment that you swore an oath to do. Further they are not living without the constitution, in fact the UCMJ was established by that very constitution Article 1 Sec. 8.

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provided that Congress has the power to regulate the land and naval forces.

Since 1806 when the Articles of War first came into being the members of the Military have been subject to them What you are advocating is that the UCMJ be cast aside and that members of the Military be civilians when off duty under the law. What you don't realize is that they would actually be violating the constitution by doing so. Again, as in your original OP Free Speech as it apples to the UCMJ does not exist for military members and as the UCMJ was established by the constitution , they ARE defending both.

When I said they forfeit the Constitution I'm referring specifically to Freedoms of Speech, Press, and Expression. You are on call 24/7 but you are not on duty 24/7.

The term "active duty" means:

•full-time duty (other than active duty for training) performed by a member of the uniformed services;

•full-time duty (other than for training purposes) as a commissioned officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or its predecessor organization the Coast and Geodetic Survey, or in the Regular or Reserve Corps of the Public Health Service;

•service as a cadet at the United States Military, Air Force, or Coast Guard Academy, or as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy; and

•authorized travel to or from the duties described above.


Reservists fall into two categories--active and inactive. Active reservists fall into the category of "weekend warrior." This group of reservists participates in training one weekend a month with their various units and once a year work for two weeks straight in Field Training Exercises (FTX). Inactive reservists do not participate in training exercises, do not receive pay and are not required to attend field training. Inactive duty are required by law to notify the Army if they move. Inactive status can only be achieved by serving first in the regular or active reserve forces. When war is declared, active reservists are called first, then inactive reservists are recalled and finally, if necessary, comes conscription
What Is Army Reserve Duty? | eHow.com

There is no such thing as on-call duty, if your on active duty, guess what your on active duty 24/7.

Give it a rest man. We all know active duty means active duty but you are not literally on duty in uniform 24/7. Obsessing over these kinds of technicalities is useless.

 

[Navy1960]

When I said they forfeit the Constitution I'm referring specifically to Freedoms of Speech, Press, and Expression. You are on call 24/7 but you are not on duty 24/7.

The term "active duty" means:

•full-time duty (other than active duty for training) performed by a member of the uniformed services;

•full-time duty (other than for training purposes) as a commissioned officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or its predecessor organization the Coast and Geodetic Survey, or in the Regular or Reserve Corps of the Public Health Service;

•service as a cadet at the United States Military, Air Force, or Coast Guard Academy, or as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy; and

•authorized travel to or from the duties described above.


Reservists fall into two categories--active and inactive. Active reservists fall into the category of "weekend warrior." This group of reservists participates in training one weekend a month with their various units and once a year work for two weeks straight in Field Training Exercises (FTX). Inactive reservists do not participate in training exercises, do not receive pay and are not required to attend field training. Inactive duty are required by law to notify the Army if they move. Inactive status can only be achieved by serving first in the regular or active reserve forces. When war is declared, active reservists are called first, then inactive reservists are recalled and finally, if necessary, comes conscription
What Is Army Reserve Duty? | eHow.com

There is no such thing as on-call duty, if your on active duty, guess what your on active duty 24/7.

Give it a rest man. We all know active duty means active duty but you are not literally on duty in uniform 24/7. Obsessing over these kinds of technicalities is useless.

Look based on what you posted, and your comment about being in the military I can assume you know that the military is not a 9-5 job, and that advocating free speech, free press, and expression, while a good thought are contrary to unit disciplne, and a unified chain of command and will if implemented even on a part time basis impact that. If young people want all those freedoms, then I suggest not exercising the Freedom to walk into a local recruiter and join the military in the first place.

 

[CurveLight]

Edit-Ignore this post. It's redundant.

That is exactly right...after being discharged from active duty, your contract stipulates a period of service in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR), usually four years.

A "stoploss" is equivalent to an instant activation from the IRR.

When I was in the IRR was six years, regardless. At least it was for me and the other Troops I knew.

Between the time I signed my papers in '97 and was honorably discharge out of the IRR last December, the IRR has become a completely different animal.

It was a giant mess under Rumsfeld (as was everything), but Gates has made it better.

That being said, the IRR is being heavily leaned on. I know of few people in the IRR that haven't been recalled.

So it's really six in one and 1/2 a dozen in the other. There is no "safe haven" in the IRR anymore if you still have a reserve obligation.

If you had six years of IRR obligation, I would venture to guess you did two years active duty. As I understand it, it's an eight year total obligation. Whatever you do active is subtracted from that 8 for your reserve obligation. If you serve eight years on active duty and get out, you have no reserve obligation whatsoever.

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

 

[Colin]

Firstly, there are good reasons for curbs on freedom of speech in the military, where the underlying value is hierarchy and authority. The armed forces are constantly being trained and readied for war and freedom of speech or expression cannot be allowed to compromise the political neutrality of the armed forces; service member’s loyalty and morale; the strict order, discipline and obedience within the military; and security of operational procedures. You ask why members of the military should not be released from restrictions when off duty. Sorry, but that is a rather ridiculous assumption. It is not a 9 to 5 job. Whether on or off duty you are a member of the armed forces 24 hours a day.

Secondly, many of the curbs on free speech in the military have their equivalents in civilian life. An employee of a private company, for example, is not protected by law from dismissal for expressing opinions distasteful or harmful to management or the company in general. That applies whether he is working or on vacation. The situation is much the same in the armed forces.

The curbs on free speech are well defined and anyone who can’t hack it shouldn’t apply. Releasing members of the armed forces from their obligations on weekend leave is laughable! It would be tantamount to a breakdown of discipline and morale.

 

[geauxtohell]

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

These were the only numbers I could find:

As of March 2009, the US Army had recalled 26,954 ready reservists since September 11, 2001. Of those, 10,592 requested exemptions of which 6,352 were granted.[8]

That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

 

[PatekPhilippe]

That's the IRR and my view is those soldiers should be called for deployment before keeping someone past their contract. Give them a break from the deployments and let the IRR fulfill their obligations.

Um. I don't think you get it. Active duty soldiers who leave service before 8 years go into the IRR or regular reserves. So if these sodliers weren't stop lossed, they'd go in the IRR and then could be mobilized too. Stop-lossed soldiers aren't being kept past their contract. They still owe time. They are being kept on active duty past their original contract. But what is the difference between that and getting involuntarily mobilized out of the IRR?

I think they both suck, but at least soldiers on active duty who are stop lossed haven't gone into civilian life and have jobs that can get screwed up.

Furthermore, the IRR now basically consists of two types of soldiers: those that are staying in for their retirement and those who have done a tour and are riding their time out. The IRR, at this point and time, is not full of soldiers who are "hiding out".

That would be the active Army and those soldiers who are skilled at pulling non-deployable duty slots.

Stop lossed soldiers are kept past their original active duty time. That means if someone signed up for four years and they are stop lossed they are kept on active duty beyond their original contract.

My point about the IRR is this: all of us who joined and served are bound by the IRR commitment no less than those still on active duty. At last check there were over 180,000 soldiers forced to stay on active duty. Why not use the IRR for rotation instead of stressing troops out on repeated deployments? All soldiers should share in the rotation. Why do you want to let IRR out of their commitment but hold active duty soldiers to theirs? As far as risking losing civilian jobs, so what? As many have pointed out all Soldiers are bound to their contracts and that includes the IRR. Furthermore, Federal law states they cannot lose their job. Once they are done serving their IRR time the company must reinstate them at their previous salary and same position or a lateral move in the position.

First of all....many of the IRR soldiers have been off active duty for a while and have jobs in the civilian sector. You can't just uproot them and send them off to war. They don't meet the criteria for remobilization. The General's in charge of the Reserve Forces don't pay much attention to left wing whining points and stupid movies about stop loss.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

These were the only numbers I could find:

As of March 2009, the US Army had recalled 26,954 ready reservists since September 11, 2001. Of those, 10,592 requested exemptions of which 6,352 were granted.[8]

That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

Ready Reservists are DRILLING reservists....not IRR.

 

[CurveLight]

Um. I don't think you get it. Active duty soldiers who leave service before 8 years go into the IRR or regular reserves. So if these sodliers weren't stop lossed, they'd go in the IRR and then could be mobilized too. Stop-lossed soldiers aren't being kept past their contract. They still owe time. They are being kept on active duty past their original contract. But what is the difference between that and getting involuntarily mobilized out of the IRR?

I think they both suck, but at least soldiers on active duty who are stop lossed haven't gone into civilian life and have jobs that can get screwed up.

Furthermore, the IRR now basically consists of two types of soldiers: those that are staying in for their retirement and those who have done a tour and are riding their time out. The IRR, at this point and time, is not full of soldiers who are "hiding out".

That would be the active Army and those soldiers who are skilled at pulling non-deployable duty slots.

Stop lossed soldiers are kept past their original active duty time. That means if someone signed up for four years and they are stop lossed they are kept on active duty beyond their original contract.

My point about the IRR is this: all of us who joined and served are bound by the IRR commitment no less than those still on active duty. At last check there were over 180,000 soldiers forced to stay on active duty. Why not use the IRR for rotation instead of stressing troops out on repeated deployments? All soldiers should share in the rotation. Why do you want to let IRR out of their commitment but hold active duty soldiers to theirs? As far as risking losing civilian jobs, so what? As many have pointed out all Soldiers are bound to their contracts and that includes the IRR. Furthermore, Federal law states they cannot lose their job. Once they are done serving their IRR time the company must reinstate them at their previous salary and same position or a lateral move in the position.

First of all....many of the IRR soldiers have been off active duty for a while and have jobs in the civilian sector. You can't just uproot them and send them off to war. They don't meet the criteria for remobilization. The General's in charge of the Reserve Forces don't pay much attention to left wing whining points and stupid movies about stop loss.

The IRR doesn't meet the criteria for remobilization? Have you shared this information with the Pentagon and DOD? They could use an obviously genius military adviser. Why do you think the IRR exists?

As for Stop Loss....once again you prove to put your partisan agenda above all else. Conservatives (not neocons and their supporters) as well as Liberals are against Stop Loss. The problem with people like you is not having the first damn clue how to defend your positions so you avoid defending them on their own merits and instead choose to demonize dissenters. That way you can avoid revealing your own inability for the debate while also not addressing points made by others. It's stale.

 

[CurveLight]

Here's some info I had not seen before and puts the situation in a whole new light. Turns out Hall mailed the song to the Pentagon in July 2009. But they only jailed him recently. Why? When he first did the song he did not keep it a secret and he had to see his First Sergeant and CO. No disciplinary action was taken. They sent him for a psych eval and nothing was found so things rolled on. However, shortly before redeployment to iraq in December he said he would not go back. The reaction was to then put him in jail for the song. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see he isn't in jail right now because of the song.
Army Spc. Marc Hall sits in jail over “Stop-loss” song | Iraq Veterans Against the War

 

[CurveLight]

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

These were the only numbers I could find:

As of March 2009, the US Army had recalled 26,954 ready reservists since September 11, 2001. Of those, 10,592 requested exemptions of which 6,352 were granted.[8]

That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

Ready Reservists are DRILLING reservists....not IRR.

Holy shit dude:


"The Ready Reserve consists of the Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve and Inactive National Guard."
Military.com Resources

 

[CurveLight]

I served way more than two years but I did get out before my five year original contract was over because I tool advantage of the military draw down under Clinton. The IRR time might have been increased as a condition under the draw down. I can't remember for sure.

The army has about 115,000 IRR soldiers. Out of that group how many have been activated?

These were the only numbers I could find:

As of March 2009, the US Army had recalled 26,954 ready reservists since September 11, 2001. Of those, 10,592 requested exemptions of which 6,352 were granted.[8]

That's from a USA Today article (redirect from a wiki article).

In my anecdotal experience (FWIW), I have my doubts. Like I said, virtually everyone I know in the IRR has been recalled. I would put money that the bulk of those 27K are soldiers who still have an obligation (and have been recently discharged).

In fact, I would corroborate that with Army Policy where an IRR soldier past their obligation can simply opt out of involuntary mobilization (which mandates their release from the IRR).

I don't see how that's leaning heavily into the RR, even with your anecdotal evidence. They have been eligible for immediate recall ever since Bush declared a national emergency. My feeling is they have been avoiding recalls as much as possible because the more you can keep the costs of the occupations contained the easier it is to maintain with little interference. Basically, we are too selfish as a nation to care what active duty troops experience but if you implemented a pseudo-draft that would effect a lot of civilians that would then put pressure on the Policy. From my understanding the Draft is what ended vietnam.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This is an interesting discussion. I'm fairly certain if a teacher or a cop or a postal worker, etc. made those comments, they'd be fired. Maybe not prosecuted; but certainly discharged.

But what I find most interesting, is that rap music is even considered protected speech. If someone says, "i'm going to blow your face off muthafucka", it is a terroristic threat. However, if they SING it, it's not. Baffling.

However when representing yourself as a member of the military and saying these things it is no longer considered protected speech. It is considered mutiny at the extreme edge and derelection of duty/failure to maintain good order and dicipline at the least.

He didn't do the song to represent the military. He did it to represent himself in protest for being forced to stay in the military a full year past his contract.

His contract was for 8 YEARS. 4 on active duty and 4 more where he could be CALLED to active DUTY. Guess what? They called him. You may want to actually learn what you are talking about before you sound off like an idiot.